C.R.Aravind v. The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR 1.C.R.Aravind 2.A.Chitra ... Petitioners Vs State rep by the Inspector of Police, W31, All Women Police Station, St.Thomas Mount, Chennai 600 016.

(Crime No.07 of 2025) ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.07 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For petitioners : M/s.Sharmila Balakrishnan For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Additional Public Prosecutor 1/7

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of IPC, in Crime No.07 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner and the defacto complainant had a matrimonial dispute between them. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed for anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

2/7

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police while opposing for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, reiterated the prosecution case. 5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6.Considering the submissions made on either side, it is seen that the first petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant and the second petitioner is the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant. Initially, a complaint has been lodged on 30.01.2024 and thereafter, it was forwarded to the Social Welfare Officer, who had conducted an enquiry and vide Na.Ka.No.1120, dated 07.02.2025, the Social Welfare Officer forwarded the complaint to register the case and thereafter, the case has been registered on 13.06.2025. During the equiry period, the jewels and silver articles have been 3/7

handed over to the victim and the same has been confirmed by the victim and the defacto complainant by her letter dated 19.02.2024. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Additional Mahila Court, Alandur, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each, with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] if the petitioners fail to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;

4/7

[b] The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

[c] the first petitioner since he is working at Bangalore shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday and Sunday for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; and the second petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation;

[d] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by the respondent as and when required; [f] the petitioners to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

[g] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

5/7

[h] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; [i] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

06.08.2025 dna To 1.The Additional Mahila Court, Alandur.

2.The Inspector of Police, W31, All Women Police Station, St.Thomas Mount, Chennai 600 016.

(Crime No.07 of 2025) 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court Madras.

6/7

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

dna 06.08.2025 7/7